ARGH!!! Open Theism makes me furious!!!

Christine

New member
Originally posted by Knight
Isaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
From the context, I see that this is addressing believers. Isaiah 53:4-5 is clearly addressing believers, " Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him sticken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." You may try to say that the "our" pharases in these verese are referring to unbelievers or "all men," but that doesn't line up with the last "our" phrase-- "our peace." Unbelievers don't have peace.

1John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

"The whole world" here is referring to to the fact that Christ's death was not just for the Jews, but also for the Gentiles. The ancient rabbinic writings used the term "world" to refer to the rest of the non-Jewish world. This makes sense seeing 1 John was written to the Jews.

1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time
From the context, it should be "all kinds" of men, as that fits better. Paul used this same word in 1 Timothy 2:1-2, just a few verses prior. "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty." Here, we see that not referring to "all men" as you would like to interpet "all," but instead to "all kinds of men" including kings and those in authority over us.



John 4:42 Then they said to the woman, “Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.�

This passage says that Christ is "the Savior of the world." That doesn't mean he died for every individual in the world. Instead, the part in question means, that He's come to save people from every nation and not just Israel as He had predominately done in the past. This can be proven from the context since Jesus had been talking to the Samaritan woman.

Romans 8:32 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?

That whole passage is talking about God's elect and predestination. Romans 8:30-33, "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He tht spared not his own Son, but delievered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who say lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth." Again, from the context, I see that the "us all" is referring to God's elect, the saved.

John 3:36 “He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.�
Yes, and only the elect are going to beleieve.



Christ died for all the sins of all men. But only those that reckon themselves (associate themselves with) Christ will avail themselves to the payment of their sin.
That's not what the verses you posted prove.

Romans 6:10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

It appears that whole chapter, includign these two verses, is addressing believers. I can tell this because earlier in the chapter it is discussing spiritual baptism. Romans 6:3, "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?" Unbelievers do not experience spiritual baptism, so this is not applicable to them.
Since it's addressed to believers, "all" would be "all saved" or "all elect."
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
“While claiming to offer meaningfulness to Christian living, open theism strips the believer of the one thing needed most for a meaningful and vibrant life of faith: absolute confidence in God’s character, wisdom, word, promise, and the sure fulfillment of his will.�

:down:

If this is what you think, all I can say is WOW!!! Mr. Ware who the quote is attributed to, either has weak faith or is clueless willingly.

Man, I've heard everything now.
 

Christine

New member
Originally posted by Turbo

No, it wouldn't. Take the verses Knight quoted for instance.

I responded in my previous post to all of Knight's verses. I'd like to respond to your verse John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." The Greek word that was translated draw (helkuo), never means simply "drawing." Every other time helkuo is translated it means to "drag someone against their will." Helkuo is used in Acts 21:30, "And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut." In Acts 21, a light drawing or even wooing doesn't make sense. So, properly translated, John 12:32 seems to be in support of God dragging men to him, even against our will. :)
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Ware is weak.

C. Gordon Olson answered Owen's dilemma in his 'mediate theology'. I think I posted this somewhere.
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by Christine

I responded in my previous post to all of Knight's verses. I'd like to respond to your verse John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." The Greek word that was translated draw (helkuo), never means simply "drawing." Every other time helkuo is translated it means to "drag someone against their will." Helkuo is used in Acts 21:30, "And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut." In Acts 21, a light drawing or even wooing doesn't make sense. So, properly translated, John 12:32 seems to be in support of God dragging men to him, even against our will. :)

Christine...

The word "men" was added to the text, and does not belong. Jesus was speaking of drawing all judgment to himself, not men.

"Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die."

A word for word translation reads:

Now judgment is of this world; now the prince of this world shall be cast out: and I if I be lifted up from the earth all will draw to myself. But this He said, signifying by what death he was about to die.
 
Last edited:

drbrumley

Well-known member
I've always been curious Sozo, why to they add words to the text? I haven't really studied that subject, so if you can make a quick comment , I'd be grateful.

It has been under my presumption, they did it to make sense of the sentence.
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by drbrumley

I've always been curious Sozo, why to they add words to the text? I haven't really studied that subject, so if you can make a quick comment , I'd be grateful.

It has been under my presumption, they did it to make sense of the sentence.
I suppose so, and in this particular text they did a great disservice to it's meaning, and added fuel to alot of false doctrine *cough* calvinism.

You only have to read the context to see that he was speaking of receiving the judgment, that we deserve.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Sozo

Christine...

The word "men" was added to the text, and does not belong. Jesus was speaking of drawing all judgment to himself, not men.

"Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die."

A word for word translation reads:

Now judgment is of this world; now the prince of this world shall be cast out: and I if I be lifted up from the earth will draw to myself. But this He said, signifying by what death he was about to die.


'pantas'= commonly translated 'all men' ....this is basic Greek grammar (see other obvious uses of word as 'all men'). Greek grammar is not identical to English. Words and phases do not always have a one to one relationship in any translation from any language (the word 'man' is not there, but it is implicit in the word/structure). It can also mean 'all things', so context will aid translation.

Drawing all 'judgment' to himself is a unique, but incorrect interpretation.

Blum: Jesus said that at the cross He would draw all men to Himself. He did not mean everybody will be saved for He made it clear that some will be lost (Jn. 5:28,29). If the drawing by the Son is the same as that of the Father (6:44), it means He will draw indisciminately. Those saved will include not only Jews, but also those from every tribe, language, people, and nation (Rev. 5:9; cf. Jn. 10:16; 11:52).

F.F. Bruce agrees with the above interpretation. It refers to Jew and Gentile forming the Body of Christ, not just the Jews. It does not support limited atonement of the 'elect' only. Other verses support unlimited atonement with the possibility of receiving or rejecting the finished work of Christ.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
Godrulz,

Why do you always put up someones opinion on a topic? I said this, and here is proof and bingo, up comes a quote from a book.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
And are you playing football? I havent checked lately, but you havent as much made a roster move as of yet.

Ok, back to topic
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by godrulz

'pantas'= commonly translated 'all men' ....this is basic Greek grammar.
Is that right? Well perhaps you would like to provide some evidence of the word 'pantas' appearing in the New Testament?

The greek word in John 12:32 is pas
F.F. Bruce agrees with the above interpretation.
I don't give a Flying Flip what F. F. Bruce thinks! He has an agenda, just like most so-called theologians.

You really should try worshipping Jesus and stop worshipping these men.

Idiot!
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by drbrumley

Godrulz,

Why do you always put up someones opinion on a topic? I said this, and here is proof and bingo, up comes a quote from a book.
He cannot think for himself, he is a worshipper of men, and not Jesus.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
Godrulz,

By reading the verses in question, the context is definitely judgement. Not men. Can you see what Jesus said, he is talking about judgement.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
Hilston,

Now is your chance, what is the correct definition of immutable?

Also impassible?

You said your not allowed to define them. I'm giving you the chance so I can better understand what it is your trying to convey.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by drbrumley

Godrulz,

Why do you always put up someones opinion on a topic? I said this, and here is proof and bingo, up comes a quote from a book.

I formulated my own opinion first. I have never heard of judgment as an option, so I thought I would look for support of your view. Instead, respected scholars who know the original languages supported the plain view I espoused.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
Godrulz,

That's cool. I can understand why. Just that the context of Jesus' words do not allow men to be inserted. I really hope you can see that. Something to ask God about you think? Cause if true, that changes the complexion of that verse drastically.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Sozo

Is that right? Well perhaps you would like to provide some evidence of the word 'pantas' appearing in the New Testament?

The greek word in John 12:32 is pas I don't give a Flying Flip what F. F. Bruce thinks! He has an agenda, just like most so-called theologians.

You really should try worshipping Jesus and stop worshipping these men.

Idiot!

You call me 'idiot' while displaying a gross ignorance of first year Greek studies?!

I am staring at an Interlinear by Zondervan. It is based on the reliable Nestle's Greek NT (also based on Westcott and Hort, etc.). The Greek word is not 'pas', but 'pantas'. Perhaps you are using a different Greek text (nope) or confusing a root word from a concordance # with the actual related word in the text?


(Vine) 'pas' is an adjective meaning 'all'. Without the article it means 'every', every kind or variety....used without a noun it virtually becomes a pronoun, meaning 'everyone' or 'anyone'.

'pantas' is the accusative (case), masculine (gender), plural (number)....hence 'all men' is grammatically defensible (cf. mood, voice, etc. of verbs).

One cannot understand the nuances of word usage and grammar based only on the root word 'pas', which you wrongly state is in the Greek text. You deny 'pantas' is in the NT...wrong again...easily refuted...

Is it easier to name call 'idiot' than to take a course to dispel ignorance?:rolleyes:
 
Top